[oslc-core] Naming Conventions within ChangeLog proposal
Martin Nally
nally at us.ibm.com
Thu Mar 24 12:01:36 EDT 2011
Yes, interesting point that I had not considered. As you know, there is a
lot of well-known discussion on the web about the different kinds of things
that URIs can identify. Google "what do uris identify?" and you will find
lots of postings from Tim Berners-Lee, David Booth and others. The simplest
are electronic documents. Another kind is real-world entities, like people
and places. Published web best practices say that a GET on the URI of a
real-world entity should not return a representation, it should do a 302
redirect to another URI, which is the URI of an electronic document that
contains information about the real-world entity (the document may contain
RDF triples with the URL of the real-world entity as the subject, not the
URL of the document).
If we were being really pure, we might say that Creation, Deletion and
Modification events are real-world things - events that really happened -
that have URIs, but do not have representations and redirect to an
electronic document that describes them. I'm not sure there is much value
for us in having this dual-URL structure, but we do need a workable name
for the electronic documents. CreationEventDescription might seem accurate
but is clumsy. Also, do we need separate RDF types for
CreationEventDescription, ModificationEventDescription, and
DeletionEventDescription or would we do better to define simply an
EventDescription resource and use properties other than rdf:type (maybe
"eventCategory") to provide more detail ?
Best regards, Martin
Martin Nally, IBM Fellow
CTO and VP, IBM Rational
tel: +1 (714)472-2690
|------------>
| From: |
|------------>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM |
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| To: |
|------------>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM at IBMCA |
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Cc: |
|------------>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|Martin Nally/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS, oslc-core at open-services.net |
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Date: |
|------------>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|03/23/2011 10:15 AM |
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Subject: |
|------------>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|Re: [oslc-core] Naming Conventions within ChangeLog proposal |
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Arthur,
Yes that was my thinking, as I found it difficult to use in a basic
sentence and understand it, like "resource is a creation". A creation
what? factory, event, creation of a project (kickoff), etc. Adding the
namespace prefix for change log also helps qualify the creation noun.
Thanks,
Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645
Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM wrote on 03/22/2011 05:59:23 PM:
> From: Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM at IBMCA
> To: Martin Nally/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
> Cc: oslc-core at open-services.net, oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net,
Steve K
> Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
> Date: 03/22/2011 10:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Naming Conventions within ChangeLog proposal
>
> Martin/Steve,
>
> Re-reading Steve's note, maybe he was objecting to olsc:Creation since it
was
> in the oslc: namespace. If it's in the oslc-log: namespace, we can use
> Creation since it's meaning is scoped to the log namespace.
>
> Regards,
>
___________________________________________________________________________
>
> Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE
>
> Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management
>
> IBM Software, Rational
>
> [image removed]
>
> Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063
>
> From:
>
> Martin Nally/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
>
> To:
>
> Arthur Ryman <ryman at ca.ibm.com>
>
> Cc:
>
> oslc-core at open-services.net, oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net, Steve K
> Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
>
> Date:
>
> 03/22/2011 05:56 PM
>
> Subject:
>
> Re: [oslc-core] Naming Conventions within ChangeLog proposal
>
> +1 on log namespace. I know we're in the habit of using underscore
instead of
> dash, but I don't like it much - can someone explain where that came
from?
>
> I don't understand the objection to oslc-log:Creation - maybe Steve can
> explain to me more before I vote.
>
> Best regards, Martin
>
> Martin Nally, IBM Fellow
> CTO and VP, IBM Rational
> tel: +1 (714)472-2690
>
> From:
>
> Arthur Ryman <ryman at ca.ibm.com>
>
> To:
>
> Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
>
> Cc:
>
> Martin Nally/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS, oslc-core at open-services.net, oslc-core-
> bounces at open-services.net
>
> Date:
>
> 03/22/2011 05:38 PM
>
> Subject:
>
> Re: [oslc-core] Naming Conventions within ChangeLog proposal
>
> Steve,
>
> +1 for the log namespace.
>
> -1 for CreateEvent - there should be a standard meaning for resource
> creation.
>
> Regards,
>
___________________________________________________________________________
>
> Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE
>
> Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management
> IBM Software, Rational
> Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063
>
>
>
>
>
> From:
> Steve K Speicher <sspeiche at us.ibm.com>
> To:
> Martin Nally <nally at us.ibm.com>, oslc-core at open-services.net
> Date:
> 03/22/2011 05:14 PM
> Subject:
> Re: [oslc-core] Naming Conventions within ChangeLog proposal
> Sent by:
> oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
>
>
>
> Might I suggest a couple alternatives to these as well:
>
> > oslc:create -> oslc:Creation
> This seems too general, is this what we want all of OSLC Core to mean by
> Creation?
>
> -> oslc:CreateEvent
> Include more descriptive noun, since in general core namespace
>
> -> oslc_log:Creation
> Same as proposed but included within some change log namespace
>
> > oslc:update -> oslc:Modification
> > oslc:delete -> oslc:Deletion
> Same as above
>
> Thanks,
> Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645
>
> > From: Martin Nally/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
> > To: oslc-core at open-services.net
> > Cc: oslc-core at open-services.net, oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> > Date: 03/22/2011 10:20 AM
> > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Naming Conventions
> > Sent by: oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> >
> > While we're at it we could maybe improve the grammar. It would feel
> better
> > to me if the terms chosen looked more like nouns than verbs - saying
> > something is "a oslc:Create" is awkward. How about the following
> >
> > oslc:create -> oslc:Creation
> > oslc:update -> oslc:Modification
> > oslc:delete -> oslc:Deletion
> >
> > It would be nice to e able to say "an" instead of just "a", but we
can't
>
> do
> > that without W3C.
> >
> > Best regards, Martin
> >
> > Martin Nally, IBM Fellow
> > CTO and VP, IBM Rational
> > tel: +1 (714)472-2690
> >
> > >
> > > Message: 1
> > > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 15:25:58 -0400
> > > From: Arthur Ryman <ryman at ca.ibm.com>
> > > To: oslc-core at open-services.net
> > > Subject: [oslc-core] ChangeLog Vocabulary and Naming Conventions
> > > Message-ID:
> > >
<OFC44196C7.0847D24D-ON8525785A.00699988-8525785A.006AC098 at ca.ibm.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> > >
> > > This is a very tiny point.
> > >
> > > The naming convention for vocabulary terms is that classes and
> > individuals
> > > begin with upper case, and properties begin with lower case. If we
> want
> > to
> > > align with that, then we should uppercase terms as follows:
> > >
> > > oslc:Create
> > > oslc:Update
> > > oslc:Delete
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> >
>
___________________________________________________________________________
> >
> > >
> > > Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE
> > >
> > > Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management
> > > IBM Software, Rational
> > > Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Oslc-Core mailing list
> > Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> > http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Oslc-Core mailing list
> Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
>
>
>
More information about the Oslc-Core
mailing list